Yesterday
Roberta and I went to hear a concert given at the Queen Anne Christian Church.
A coworker had two extra tickets which he shared with us. Ingrid Matthews
played a violin made by Hendrik Jacobs of Amsterdam, Holland, in 1703, and was
periodically accompanied by John Lenti who played a theorbo built by Klaus
Jacobsen of London, England, in 1985, based on a model by built by Matteo
Sellas of Venice, Italy, in 1640. They performed music of the baroque era. This
included a Sonata in D minor for violin and continuo by Philipp Friedrich
Böddecker, a Partita in A minor for unaccompanied violin by Johan Paul von
Westhoff, a Fantasia in B-flat major by Georg Philipp Telemann, a Passacaglia
in G minor for unaccompanied violin by Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber, an Aria from
Rinaldo by George Frideric Handel, a Sonata in A minor for unaccompanied violin
by Johann Sebastian Bach and a Sonata in D major for violin and continuo by
Johann Heinrich Schmelzer.
The
intricacy of Ingrid Matthew’s playing was nothing less than stupefying. How is
it possible to remember so many nuances, so many rapid passages and throbbing
vibratos? At one point the violin seemed to be producing two separate sounds
simultaneously.
I
was greatly amused by Ingrid’s black sequined blouse. It flashed and
scintillated while she played and seemed to provide a visual accompaniment to
her playing.
I
wish I could describe what she played. But I don’t have the vocabulary or
knowledge. I’ve never played an instrument. I still don’t know what an octave
is. Many people have explained it to me. I’ve looked it up in music books and
Wikipedia. But the concept still eludes me. And that’s just an octave. I
wouldn’t know an arpeggio if I tripped over one, or the difference between a
major and a minor. I’ve seen musicians twist pegs and pluck and strum and cock
their ear and twist the pegs and pluck and strum again and again until the tone
sounded correct to them. Nothing sounded different to me. They clearly heard
something that I did not.
Which
is why I’ve never been invited to play for the Rolling Stones or entertain my
quiet moments with a song and a little piano playing. I can do none of these
things. It’s frustrating. Because I love music.
What
I did hear during Ingrid Matthew’s performance were patterns of sound that were
pleasing to the ear, intriguing in their complexity and flair, but something
far more than that, something less obvious, a phenomenon so fine and
transcendent it seemed miraculous that anyone could produce it without
levitating. No doubt that’s why musicians always seem different when they’re
playing music. They seem transported. Entranced.
My
chosen instrument is language. Words. I sense a keen music inherent in
language. But I can’t even describe that. I don’t have the words available to
tell you what words do when they deliver the goods, crash out of the tyranny of
convention to achieve something new, something incandescent and boundless. Something
akin to music.
2 comments:
An especially lovely final paragraph here! Its suggestion of words delivering the goods I'm reminded a bit of Wallace Stevens' lines from "Variations on a Summer Day" --
Words add to the senses. The words for the dazzle / Of mica, the dithering of grass, / The Arachne integument of dead trees, / Are the eye grown larger, more intense.
And the suggestion of words achieving "something new" reminds me a bit of W.S. Graham's declaration in a January 1944 letter:
I believe [that] each . . . poem [is] an addition to the world, not a distortion or mathematic of known digits of what we have already. After each poem there should be such a apparent addition to the world that it will be as obvious as a new over-4000ft mountain added to the Grampians.
[I had to look up "Grampians"!]
Thanks much John!
What great quotes. Thank you, Steve.
Post a Comment